←back to thread

Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge

(www.businessinsider.com)
397 points pyman | 1 comments | 07 Jul 25 09:20 UTC | HN request time: 0.303s | source
Show context
bgwalter ◴[07 Jul 25 14:38 UTC] No.44490836[source]▶
Here is how individuals are treated for massive copyright infringement:

https://investors.autodesk.com/news-releases/news-release-de...

replies(8): >>44490942 #>>44491257 #>>44491526 #>>44491536 #>>44491907 #>>44493281 #>>44493918 #>>44493925 #
nh23423fefe ◴[07 Jul 25 15:43 UTC] No.44491526[source]▶
What point are you making? 20 years ago, someone sold pirated copies of software (wheres the transformation here) and that's the same as using books in a training set? Judge already said reading isnt infringement.

This is reaching at best.

replies(1): >>44493534 #
1. amlib ◴[07 Jul 25 18:55 UTC] No.44493534[source]▶
Aren't you comparing the wrong things? First example is about the output/outcome, what is the equivalent for LLMs? Also, not all "pirated" things are sold, most are in fact distributed for free.

"Pirates" also transform the works they distribute. They crack it, translate it, compress it to decrease download times, remove unnecessary things, make it easier to download by splitting it in chunks (essential with dial-up, less so nowadays), change distribution formats, offer it trough different channels, bundle extra software and media that they themselves might have coded like trainers, installers, sick chiptunes and so on. Why is the "transformation" done by a big corpo more legal in your views?